|
And likewise, I think of Edelstein's vehement
condemnation of "Life Is Beautiful." I agree, it's not
historically accurate, it doesn't portray the dark evil of
concentration camps, but isn't there something compelling about
the idea of a father wanting to protect his child from evil?
Okay, so a real father attempting the same thing would have been
shot. But the first version at least has the benefit of being
true to a loving parent's vision of reality, while the second
version is true primarily to the Nazi vision of reality. I think
both have their place, but apparently Edelstein wants only the
second. Personally, I find that limiting (and I'm not related to
or aquainted with any Holocaust observers, so already my
experience is limited), and limiting one's experiences tends to
make them less real. Humor is a human reaction, and not, I think,
always a way to deny reality, but rather, sometimes a way to take
reality into your life and make it your own. If the Nazis'
actions have stripped us of the ability to react to their actions
in all the ways available to us, I think they have succeeded in
making us less human.
Of course, at the time, I was writing questions
about the Holocaust for children and was constantly struggling
with how I could possibly explain to 12-year-olds that things
like this happen. So maybe I was just susceptible to the idea
that surviving in order to remember is very adult concept of
retribution, while perhaps it would be enough for a child to
survive in order to be happy at some later point in time.
All of which is to say that the absence of room
Edelstein's mind for either of these alternative views strikes me
as troublingly ungenerous and uncompassionate.
Whew, okay, just needed to get that off my
chest. I feel better now.
|
